Ellington

Ms. Ladd's and Ms. Mott's recent columns notwithstanding, can we all be honest and admit that Sarah Palin and her family, just a generation ago, would have been considered a picture of American normalcy? Look at them: a husband and wife who seem to have had a stable marriage for 20 years or so with five children; they like the outdoors and sports; they grew up on America's last frontier. Can editor Ladd really believe, as she wrote, that Gov. Palin's "associations and beliefs" go "deep into darkness?"

Gov. Palin's traditional stances on sexual and moral issues, particularly abortion, seems to be the sticking point for Ms. Ladd and many others. Suggestion: Instead of doing the 1950s McCarthy thing of calling Mrs. Palin anti-U.S. government, "deep into darkness," etc. and smearing her with guilt by association, why not do a serious inquiry into this issue.

Why not consider why the availability of abortion seems so important to so many Americans? Why not genuinely and fairly inquire as to why so many others are so adamantly opposed to abortion, even in cases of rape? Why not honestly ask when human life begins? Is it at conception? And—this is a very important question—if the government can define an unborn life as a nonperson, what does that mean for the rest of us? (Editor's note: In 2005, then-JFP Assistant Editor Casey Parks addressed issues in the story "No Apologies: Inside Mississippi's Pro-Life Movement.")

If we respond to the question of abortion based on what we think our individual convenience requires—such as getting out of an unexpected, unwanted, embarrassing, expensive pregnancy—then we are simply reacting, and we are ignoring serious questions with profound implications concerning human dignity and freedom. Peace to all.

Jim McCafferty
Jackson

Editor Ladd responds: Ms. Palin's abortion views (which include forcing a rape or incest victim to give birth) are counter to the vast majority of Americans. But it is her and her husband's other associations that are even less "normalԗincluding being close to a party and a church that believe Alaska is the last frontier for the "second coming" to her need to have witchcraft scared out of her by a Kenyan minister. Her belief that being "close" to Russia is a foreign-policy qualification is perhaps scariest of all.

Israeli Motives
Over the weekend of Sept. 13, the Department of Defense notified Congress of the planned sale of weapons, 1,000 GBU-39 and small diameter bunker buster bombs, to 13 Middle Eastern countries, including Israel. Among the list of weapons being sold to Israel are . Designed to penetrate fortified facilities located deep underground, the bombs would likely be used in the event of an Israeli strike on Iran, according to the Jerusalem Post. Congress has 30 days to object to the $77 million deal. I urge Mississippi's congressional representatives to challenge the sale of these bombs. The Israeli government's intentions must be questioned given Israel's track record of directly funding the terrorist group Hamas, then how will the Israeli government really use these weapons?

Kent Hilburt
Poplarville